i think probably the romans decided on 1, 2 and 5 because it is probably quite efficient for numbers of characters to write numbers. 1s are half the width of the rest of the ciphers they use, so 3 and 8 are the longest single digit arabic numbers with III and VIII and they made a scheme where the less-than-next cipher could be represented by a prefix like IX for 9 or IL for 40
although there was some variance with those schemes, XXXX and IIII were sometimes used.
since they didn't have any kind of movable type i can only speculate that they were comparing its efficiency to tallies which are based on 1 and 5.